Quantum Communication and the IPER Ontology: When intuition meets linear certainty

Restoring Cognitive Balance in the Architecture of Intelligence

Any communication system that omits one of the core cognitive functions — intuition, ethics, reason, or practice — becomes not only incomplete, but dangerous. The inquisition of the 21st century may arrive not in robes, but in qubits.

Abstract

As quantum networks and AI systems evolve, the question of interpretative coherence becomes urgent. While engineering efforts focus on reducing physical noise and transmission errors, little attention is given to semantic or cognitive distortion. This article argues that the IPER typology of intelligence — consisting of Intuitive, Practical, Ethical, and Rational functions — must be integrated into the foundational architecture of quantum communication systems. Without such integration, we risk repeating historical patterns of imbalance and systemic error, merely accelerated by quantum infrastructure.

1. Introduction: A New Kind of Overload

Modern societies are no longer facing a deficit of knowledge, but a surplus — a saturation that parallels biological systems approaching their carrying capacity. In this landscape of hyperinformation, it is not only the quantity of data that matters but its cognitive compatibility with the receiver. As physical networks strive to eliminate noise, semantic noise proliferates, creating confusion, conflict, and polarization.

Quantum communication promises unprecedented speed and security, but if built without understanding human cognitive diversity, it may serve as a vehicle for accelerated imbalance.

2. The IPER Typology: A Cognitive Compass

Developed by Elena Buran, Egor Miloradovich, and Lex, the IPER typology defines four fundamental types of intelligence:

• Homo Intuitivus: Pattern-based, synthetic, anticipatory.

• Homo Rationalis: Linear, logical, hierarchical.

• Homo Ethicus: Value-based, dialogical, relational.

• Homo Practicus: Sensory, embodied, action-oriented.

Each type corresponds to a dominant function of consciousness (Intuition, Logic, Ethics, Sensory). The balance between those is not optional — it is the minimal viable ontology of human sense-making. When one or more are suppressed, entire dimensions of reality are excluded, leading to systemic blind spots.

3. Quantum Communication: Solving Physical Noise, Ignoring Semantic Noise / When intuition meets linear certainty

Quantum communication (QC) uses entanglement and quantum states to create ultra-secure, fast data transmission. Core innovations include:

• Quantum Key Distribution (QKD): unbreakable encryption

• Entanglement Swapping: long-distance network construction

• Quantum Repeaters and Error Correction

These focus on physics-based integrity. But what about cognitive integrity? What if a system delivers error-free data — yet the data itself is misaligned with the receiver’s dominant cognitive function?

Just like ignoring sensor bias in data collection leads to wrong AI conclusions, ignoring cognitive bias in transmission design may distort human-AI interaction.

4. Historical Parallels: What Happens When One Function Dominates

Human history offers precedents:

• Inquisition: Rational-practical dominance; ethical-intuitive suppression.

• Totalitarianism: Linear rationality weaponized; intuition called madness.

• Techno-utopianism: Logic without ethics; speed without sense.

Each time, the excluded function returns through collapse, revolt, or trauma. Quantum systems, if unbalanced, may not escape this pattern — only repeat it faster.

5. Proposal: Embedding IPER in the Semantic Layer of Communication

It is natural and organic: just as there are four poles of the earth, there are four poles of intelligence.

We propose:

1. Ontological Filtering: Quantum and AI systems must include a semantic layer that adapts outputs to the receiver’s IPER type.

2. Multi-modal Transmission: Allow varied expression forms — visual, embodied, verbal — each aligned to a cognitive function.

3. Function-based Redundancy: Instead of error-correction only for transmission, add cognitive redundancy — ensure each of the four functions is activated over time.

This could mean:

• UX that shifts from visual dominance (practicus) to predictive flows (intuitivus)

• AI outputs that switch between moral reasoning and structural logic depending on the user

6. Consequences of Omission: Fourth Function as Noise

If only 2 or 3 functions are structurally embedded (e.g. Rational + Practical), the excluded one becomes 'noise':

• Ethics becomes ‘sentimentality’

• Intuition becomes ‘hallucination’

• Practicality becomes ‘simplicity bias’

• Rationality becomes ‘cold logic’

Semantic conflict increases. Misunderstanding rises. Polarization deepens.

7. Toward a Balanced Intelligence Infrastructure

The IPER framework can help define future quantum-AI interfaces that are not just faster — but smarter, more adaptive, and more human-compatible.

Let us not repeat the error of building perfect machines for broken cognition.

Let us build systems that speak all four languages of human understanding.

References

Elena Buran, Egor Miloradovich, and Lex (2025) The Evolution of Intelligence — A Book About Humanity’s Future in the Age of AI

(IPER Typology) https://www.verbs-verbi.com/post/the-evolution-of-intelligence-free-pdf-book-on-human-intelligence-and-ai

___

When intuition meets linear certainty